User talk:Hhhippo/BuildArchive/P/W ToF Tank
Rate-a-build Please test and vote on new builds. Please do not vote on a build until you have actually tested it. Favoured: * Tested. ( is this a vote? not sure what to do with it --Gobla 08:58, 28 December 2006 (CST) ) # Works great. Bug Bug In Your Bed 06:56, 25 December 2006 (CST) # Works --Gobla 17:04, 25 December 2006 (CST) # This build works extremely well. The people who post comments like "Use a Warrior" have either not tried the build or stunk with it. Made In Ascalon 14:37, 27 December 2006 (CST) # Works really well in pve and After playing with this build though most of nightfall and factions I havent really found a pve counter to this build. Tanking does work with this build because of the 50% reduction to dmg. The whole team is benefited by Gfte, anthem of flame, and those who you used blazing finaly on. The axe attacks Plus build adrenilin fast to shout Gfte that triggers blazing finaly. Using the stand your ground variant also works well if you team is fine with you not having a rez. /sign # good build, although a bit fidgety, i tested it and then again with a few points dropped from axe mastery and into command, felt a bit better--Kkagari 04:57, 2 January 2007 (CST) #Looks solid, has good party damage reduction. Obviously people don't understand the concepts involved, as is generally the case. "Use Warrior" indeed :P If you hadn't called it a tank it might have helped. --Epinephrine 18:16, 2 January 2007 (CST) #Awesome build; killed 3 tanks by my self with it, continous health loss of foes. The ppl that say use a tank are probably tanks that cant get a group because of this build--mk. # A 100 Blades variant on this build has greatly boosted my Zos Shivros score and bores my monk because she has nothing to heal! It works very well with 2 other popular builds, searing flames and minion master (GftE gives minions criticals and ToF protects them), and heroes run it flawlessly. It's also easy to modify the build if you want even more party-wide defense instead of DPS. People just need to learn that spear is not the fastest way to gain adrenlaine for GftE spam, and 96 AL is still a fairly durable frontliner. FoxBat 05:18, 5 January 2007 (CST) #: Hey! I use the same group, with me as a motivation paragon (sf, mm and paragon with hundred blades). This build, however, is way too different to just call it a variant. It's more of an inspiration. I mean, there are only TWO skills in common, go for the eyes and aggressive refrain. NightAngel 07:48, 5 January 2007 (CST) #Considering we still don't have a way to deal with noobs submitting builds, I'll be voting without testing like veryone else ;). Now I think those who voted unfavorably are missing some very good points of the build and probably didnt even read the usage section, or didn't follow it. The paragon should have a lot of energy from "Go for the eyes!" so casting burning refrain/they're on fire/cycloning etc shouldn't be a problem. This sets multiple foes on fire, reduces their damage dramatically etc. We're talking massive damage (Degen is significant to later stage foes), and defense. Also, I can see people voting unfavored because it does 2 goals but only about 90% as good as other builds. It tanks 90% as good (gives the rest of the frontline tankage as well) and deals damage 90% as good a a favored build, so people say it "sucks at both" when it doesn't. Minor gripe: why isn't the axe zealous? Also, if energy becomes a minor issue (didn't test so I don't know), focused anger would be superior (spammage of GftE) (Not a fifty five 09:04, 5 January 2007 (CST)) #: Not a fifty, the problem is, a paragon with a warrior weapon using aggressive refrain, go for the eyes and burning is a good idea. However, this is poorly executed and could be heavily improved. Come on, you know I love new and odd ideas, but they have to work efficiently, and there are better ways of doing the same thing. I dont mean a warrior, or even splitting warrior and paragon. I mean the same concept, a paragon with a war weapon. It can be made much better, so that's why it should be unfavored. NightAngel 10:19, 5 January 2007 (CST) #::Shouldn't you make these suggestions for change, instead of directly voting unfavoured? --Ufelder 10:27, 5 January 2007 (CST) #:::I thought of it this way: it's such a radical change it isn't a variant, it is different build. Here is my line of reasoning. What would make this build unique, what can it do that a "pure" tank or paragon can't? Maintain aggressive refrain (an easy IAS with no upkeep, that can't be removed and lasts forever) and quickly charge paragon adrenaline skills. Faster attack, adrenaline. Ok, that's the basic idea. So how do you use that? well, first, you want a sword, not an axe, to further improve attack speed - it also comes with a great elite for this idea, hundred blades. Next: build on the adrenaline theme. A furious sword , certainly, but what else? Natural temper! It feeds itself, and the paragon operates under shouts, not enchantments. I left they're on fire and anthem of flame to another paragon (I use Ra Hathor, his build is in my userpage). Long story short, I use Ra with 3 heroes, Morghan using natural temper, hundred blades, watch yourself, go for the eyes, barbarous slice, gash (the one that causes deep wound when bleeding), aggressive refrain and shields up (comm 10, lead 9, sword 12, tactic 10). My MM also uses a few command shouts, as does my searing flamer (who also carried bladeturn refrain). There, that's my idea. Now feel free to bash it. ;) NightAngel 14:35, 5 January 2007 (CST) #::::I think the build is implying its used with a pug not heroes, as just about any general pve build here is :P As a solo character build entering a pug as a support tank, this is about as good as this concept gets. (Not a fifty five 15:43, 5 January 2007 (CST)) #::::: I have only one question. What is a solo character? PvE without heroes is noob-land. Oh noes. I always make sure I have my reliable, beautifully-armored, green-equipped, elite-using, order-following friends. Sure, then u have the other 4 slots, in which you can take anyone, basically. That poor assassin who can't get a group. The lonely mesmer that gets passed over for nukers. It's a win-win. You get the mission done, and help out those humble people, who are trying the mission for the 3rd time. It gives you a warm fuzzy feeling inside :) NightAngel 16:02, 5 January 2007 (CST) #::::::Heh, nobody in gates of anguish uses heroes, calling em noobs? ;) not quite sure I grasp what you're saying. (Not a fifty five 16:20, 5 January 2007 (CST)) # The only thing better than this is 4 tanks. Good job with build. ShiftTab 17:49, 10 January 2007 (CST) # I like it. Finally Paragon has a legitimate reason to wade into a mob with the rest of the warriors bartwart 20:15, 10 January 2007 (CST) #I love it! Good job --Fobdo 11:57, 13 January 2007 (CST) # Quite an effective build, and an improvement on the Tank concept. Anthem of Flame, Go For The Eyes!, and They're on Fire! not only benefit the tank, but the whole team as well. Beat the Doppleganger in Prophecies with no trouble, under 30 seconds. Though, if you could add Leader's Comfort to the Variants, that would be great. As lousy a self-heal as it is, I feel more comfortable carrying one than having to rely entirely on the whim/ability of the monk. # Extraordinarily effective tank, but best combo'd with a Searing Flames elementalist (or two). I disagree with using Triple Chop and Cyclone Axe. They're not bad skills, but I prefer Triple Chop and Dismember. 128.54.68.29 14:52, 31 January 2007 (CST) # Excellent concept. I've prefered using it with a scythe and focused anger though. Still same concept of Agg Ref, GftE, and Blazing Finale; with ToF for damage reduction. More fun to play than typical warrior builds, more damage output, the benefit to all the parties physical attackers from the GftE spam. I'm ambivelant on the excellent adjecent damage reduction vs. the non adjacent no damage reduction. The two at least balance each other out, and considering the rest of the builds qualities it is very worth it.--12pxWindjammer 13:34, 1 February 2007 (CST) # I'm late on voting, but this build is amazing. With good positioning, the build gets tons of adrenaline to spam GFTE, spreads tons of burning, subsequently the group doesn't take damage. Rarely had energy problems and 99% of mobs will not counter this. Doom Music 15:02, 1 February 2007 (CST) # I've tested this build extensively in PvP (maybe 30+ ABs with it and 5 RAs). I really have a lot of success with it, especially in ABs. Couple things though. One, I swapped out the elite for Soldier's Fury. I dropped Aggressive Refrain as I found it annoying to constantly refresh and if you let it lapse for whatever reason, you're screwed really bad. Soldier's gives a constant 33% attack speed bonus, which works well enough for building adrenaline, and you can really lay into squishies with it. So I dropped aggressive refrain for furious axe - a high damage attack that really hurts if you crit with it (with Go for the Eyes). In the Res Sig Spot, I use Leader's comfort, which often heals you for 140 life in ABs. One other thing... I sucked with this build at first. It's different, and I think I wasn't very aware of the combos here intil like my 5th PvP with it. I think the tank name really throws people off. The thing is, it isn't a tank, but *can* tank at various points in a battle. To be best used however, you should already have a tank in your party, so it's often not an issue. Finally, it should be recognized that in many PvPs, Paragons are low-priority targets. This is a huge advantage for this build since you can often get a whole lot of time to flame-broil your enemies as well as cut their damage in half. Nobody expects a very effective Paragon build in ABs since most people don't have a clue how to use them. Big unwritten advantage here... Top-notch build. #Works pretty well at the end of the day. I prefer using a sword, but regardless, it's a good idea. NightAngel 13:14, 22 February 2007 (CST) #It's decent, but nothing extraordinary. I like the creativity of giving a Paragon an axe, however. Favoured. #Use a Paragon. :P I'll give it a shot once I hit 20 with mine and cap TC. I'm not very fond of PUGs lately, so I've been hero/henching my way through the stuff I know, this will help a LOT if it works right.--Corcis 22:34, 9 March 2007 (CST) #:Update: Trying it out and it certainly works. It isn't perfect in my book - there's little forgiveness in it (let BF or TOF down and it's just an axagon), there isn't much of a feel of flexibility and it's really hectic. I'm not the best, not by a long shot, but this is still a usable build, even favorable. I don't feel like I'm going to die in combat, either. --Corcis 19:36, 11 March 2007 (CDT) #I don't think that 10% of the unfavoured voters actually tested this build. I test all builds because just generally I have all Paragon skills, Ranger skills and Warrior skills on my Paragon and have a shit load of money... But I'm just voting to cancel out the latest unfavoured build...--Silence Renegade 14:37, 17 March 2007 (CDT) #Always been a love of mine, can't believe I unfavored ><. [[User:Solus| Solus]] 09:28, 25 April 2007 (CDT) ---- Unfavoured: #Use a Warrior. — [[User:Rapta|'Rapta']] 19px (talk| ) 15:19, 24 December 2006 (CST) #:Ebon dust + cyclone more leik, 90% > 50% — Skuld 15:20, 24 December 2006 (CST) #:Ebon dust + cyclone only reduces damage from adjacent physical enemies. Wich I might add is an overall small group of enemies. This build causes more damage ( lots of burning ) more defense ( 50% on all damage > 90% on adjacent physical. ) since you can use blazing finale on other allies wich will also benefit from GftE. Most of the time a group is 50% physical and 50% caster. This build can reduce 100% of that damage by 50%, your build reduces 50% of that damage by 90%, in other words merely 45%. Provided ofcourse you can keep all foes adjacent to yourself wich this build doesn't rely on. Please atleast attempt to look at practical situations and a bit farther then first glances.--Gobla 09:18, 25 December 2006 (CST) #/agree, also useless vs. foes immune to Burning and pwn'd by Extinguish. 24.6.147.36 15:35, 24 December 2006 (CST) #:Your statement that it fails against bosses with Natural Resistance is wrong. The burning can be put on fast enough again. Same for Extinguish, give me one situation where you're having trouble with putting conditions on targets in PvE. Unless you're not going for the Monk first, you'll have no trouble with it. Bug #:Extinguish is hardly ever used by monsters in PvE. Even if it was, it's 15 energy to counter 4 adrenaline. I would say that's a pretty damn effective way of draining monster energy.--Gobla 09:23, 25 December 2006 (CST) #Warrior much better -- Sigm@ 11:12, 25 December 2006 (CST) #It worked ok, but after testing it I wasn't at all convinced that it was actually good. Tested builds should be the best or at the very least pretty good, in this case, there are better options. Anyways, this isn't anything new, ToF has been done, and it has gotten unfavored before. Defiant Elements 01:39, 27 December 2006 (CST) #This is another build that would be more effective as two builds - One Paragon and One Warrior. Why try to do everything on the same character? Of course there is a synergy with, say, Anthem of Flame and triple chop (I'm assuming it burns all three targets?). But why not have an axe warrior and a paragon in that case? Each would do a better job, and the team would be stronger for having two specialized characters. In PvE, there is no excuse for not splitting up jobs - you have heroes for that. NightAngel 21:39, 27 December 2006 (CST) #:Actually, I tried the thing you said would be better. One warrior, one Paragon. I found out that it wasn't even close to being as effective as this build is. I'm just wondering, did ANY of you even tested it? If you didn't, which I assume, then you shouldn't even vote. Bug In Your Bed 06:45, 28 December 2006 (CST) #:: In short, this build is not good enough for favored in my opinion, but it inspired me to build another one based on it, that worked incredibly well in my 4-man farm build with heroes. And for that, I am thankful. :) NightAngel 13:17, 4 January 2007 (CST) # No! -Warskull 18:49, 28 December 2006 (CST) #:Warskull you have been voting without any given reason on various builds. Could you please give an explanation for your vote? #::Me Warskull, me no like build! *beats chest*--12pxWindjammer 22:31, 31 January 2007 (CST) #Yeh, I tested, and it turns out blazing finale is adjacent soo.. — Skuld 21:09, 28 December 2006 (CST) #:Then I suppose it's convient that the ToF Tank operates in melee, i.e. adjacent range, right? Your complaint is irrelevant. --Zinger314 22:00, 28 December 2006 (CST) #:::Then.. ebon dust aura? — Skuld 22:01, 28 December 2006 (CST) #::::This build, and ToF in general, works against casters. Ebon Dust Aura doesn't. Isn't that why you stroke out your previous argument, because it was completely and utterly wrong? --Zinger314 22:04, 28 December 2006 (CST) #::::: Hmm, yes. Anyway, just not feeling it, I just think a derv and a backline para are better — Skuld 22:07, 28 December 2006 (CST) #Skuld has made good points above. - Krowman 17:23, 4 January 2007 (CST) #:Unless you can convince me otherwise, Skuld's points are still incorrect (he admitted it!). See my response above for the reasons. --Zinger314 19:12, 4 January 2007 (CST) #::I think he's right (and that NightAngel and Sigm@ are right) in that a tank and a backline Paragon would be better than this tanking Para. - Krowman 01:38, 5 January 2007 (CST) #:::OMG, what a great idea, compare it to using 2 characters! Come on, how much sense does that make? I think a hybrid prot/healing monk isn't as effective as having a prot monk and a healing monk, let's go vote those down. --Epinephrine 08:06, 5 January 2007 (CST) #::::Those builds are generally better than a pure heal or prot :-/ this does both things worse than the alternative — Skuld 08:50, 5 January 2007 (CST) #I agree with others that warrior and para works much better with more flexibility and utility... DPS from a warrior is higher, and probably carries its own shouts such as Watch yourself... Para can still do the same except using aggressive refrain, focused anger, to charge go for the eyes. The para can then take other skills to buff the rest of the team. --Lania Elderfire 02:18, 19 January 2007 (CST) #Warriors use martial weapons better by default. -Auron 09:45, 28 January 2007 (CST) #: I hate this argument, it is just wrong. Check the damage progression tables. Up to att 12, damage progresses by a factor of 0.08. After 12, it progresses by 0.03, less than half effectiveness for each point above 12. If a martial class using a martial weapon from another class is able to get the att to 12, it will be 95% as effective with it as a prime to that weapon using it.--12pxWindjammer 13:22, 1 February 2007 (CST) #::Just did exact calcs, it would be 87% as effective with it vs. a prime using a headpeice and super rune. If the off class has somthing worth using (which this build does, as do many others), than it is very worth it.--12pxWindjammer 13:27, 1 February 2007 (CST) #:::If we wanna get reeeally technically, its more like 83% conmsidering attributes also increase critical hit chances ;) I still vote favored tho (Not a fifty five 13:21, 8 February 2007 (CST)) #You're getting squat damage reduction from anything a few metres away. –Ichigo724 13:31, 31 January 2007 (CST) #You don't get reduction from things that aren't adjacent to you, so what of rangers/elementalists and the like? Do you just pray they don't see you? Sure it works great for adjacent, but a tank could (and does) do this better with fewer skills. Paragons and Warriors do not have the same AL to whomever said that, Para base armor = 80. Warrior base = 80 + 20 v/s physical.... so, again, what do you do against casters? Break aggro to reduce their damage to you (lol) ? ---[[User:Nightshadow| Nightshadow]] 19px 22:30, 6 February 2007 (CST) #: When I use it in PvP, someone (like a stepping Sin) often quickly attacks enemy casters. So the casters are on fire and do half damage. (Fallingmercury44 10:27, 9 February 2007 (CST)) #New updates and a restating of Nightshadow and Ichigo's ideas.... Get a Warrior. 69.1.62.80 15:00, 10 February 2007 (CST) #you really need some healing...--InfestedHydralisk 16:17, 27 February 2007 (CST) #Needs self heals, TOF is harder to maintain now. --SBR 16:26, 27 February 2007 (CST) #No thankyou. [[User:Solus| Solus]] 19px 06:44, 1 March 2007 (CST) #Warrior is better tank for just one reason. They have skills that increase max HP. This gives monks a lot more buffer space on healing. Try this in DoA, I'm sure it won't work as well as warrior. Lightblade 22:34, 2 March 2007 (CST) #I agree with everyone above me. And what's with paragon builds with no self-heal?!? You are not going to expect a monk to heal your, are you? -X H K #Ditto, this build may 'work' but there are better builds out there that will do the same thing.--[[User:Saranis|'Saranis']] (talk | ) 16:59, 22 March 2007 (CDT) Keep It Untested Several people have labled the build as "unfavored." 4 people (plus the 2 unsigned people) have favored the build. 7 people have unfavored the build, but half of them admit to not testing the build and/or their comments have been discredited. The build is not clearly "unfavored" if half-disagree. It is still in the testing process. --Zinger314 23:04, 28 December 2006 (CST) :Uh...I only could 4 Favored in the above? What unsigned are you speaking of? Also you're down by 3, regardless, it's Unfavored. The votes have not been struck out by an admin so you can not remove the Unfavored tag. Entropy 23:08, 28 December 2006 (CST) ::See Project:Build vetting procedure. Per that documented site procedure, it cannot go back to untested. Do not change it back to untested. Also, note that the guideline states "Voting after testing the build in game and leaving a detailed comment with the vote is prefered, but not needed to make the vote count." --- Barek (talk • ) - 18:37, 10 January 2007 (CST) :::Am I missing something? I count three more favoured votes than unfavoured. --Ufelder 00:05, 11 January 2007 (CST) ::::It can be changed to favored now that that exceeds the unfavored by three. The problem was that the author chose to ignore site procedures and continually revert it back to untested, which per the guidelines should not be done. --- Barek (talk • ) - 00:16, 11 January 2007 (CST) ::::: I got to respond to the unfavored voters here. I think I've seen the same people vote unfavored in 100 different builds and they again, voted unfavored here. Id like to know of the unfavored peeps who took this to LvL 20 and REALLY tested it. I'm just tired of the same old build flamers who leave little or no reason why they vote against builds when its OBVIOUS they haven't really tested them. Ok, so Ebon Dust Cloak and Cyclone work. So does a fire elementalist and a water elementalist, it doesnt mean one should be negated entirely. This build works, and it works well. It may look like a scabbed together, who knows kind of build and it shows by the responses in the unfavored. But Ive tested this a lot and it is very effective in PvE. I wish the same ol' build flamers would just not vote if they didn't actually test it vigorously, and not just making assumtions. ubernoober Response by Creator to Posters Yeesh, if everyone is going to trash the build immediately after is posted, then what's the point of that disclaimer at the top? ("OMG, it's thinking outside of the box, it's crap, even though I haven't tested it!") * "Thinking outside the box". Well no. There have been many ToF tank builds submitted to the Wiki, most if not all have gone Unfavored for the same reasons presented here. Do your research before trying to satirize the situation. And the whole argument that OMG it's unfavored liek 3 minutes after I posted, they must not have tested!!! false. You don't need to build a bad blueprint to know that it's bad. Testing isn't even needed to determine this is a Bad Build. And the disclaimer? That's currently in dispute anyways. We're working on coming up with a better vetting system. *Also, so many builds get Unfavored that it really should Stop Surprising People! Never submit a build and automatically assume it'll be favored just because it works for you. --1. ToF affects damage caused by casters. EDA + Cyclone only affects damage caused by Melee/Ranger, and not casters. If you check Guru, I already slammed your argument, Skuld. 2. How does "Use a Warrior" unfavor this build, Rapta? More information; I'll gladly answer any questions and critisims that you may have, because I do not see anything better a Warrior can do that this build can't. (Except 16 Weapon Mastery. But Burning + "GtfE" easily surpasses that advantage) -'made'' to do. :About the "Use a Warrior" comment, my testing showed that you honestly spend too much time setting yourself up. With one or two tanking skills, a warrior tank can do a lot of what this build does without wasting all of the skill slots. Defiant Elements 01:41, 27 December 2006 (CST) 3. Well, duh, every build has counters. Why do you so idealize Warriors, when they are shut down completely by Blinding Surge? But your examples are even more erroneous. There are no foes immune to Burning (except those with Frigid Armor. But I can't think of any enemy in PvE who actually uses Frigid Armor, and no one in PvP uses it), and the Burning is easily reapplied after Extinguish. * Well, duh, every build has counters. You just proved my point for me. If the build had less easy counters than maybe I wouldn't have voted unfavored, hmm? You rely exclusively on Burning to make this build useful. That's a very conditional build. And yes, Frigid Armor was my point exactly. PvE? So what, "anything works in PvE". PvP - have you seen how many SF Elementalists are in PvP. Quite a few. Frigid Armor would really start to be useful. Extinguish is a party wide condition removal, and heals the target if they're Burning. It's something you might expect to find on a Monk. Oh, the burning can be reapplied, of course!...Healing Breeze = no degen from Burning anyways. Or besides that, any condition removal skill can be used to remove Burning. Give me a Cover Condition and then the build is better. *PvE foes with natural resistance will halve your already short Burning duration. Cast it on Shiro = bad idea. Cast it on Mallyx = bad idea. That's not immune, I'll grant you that, but I was referring to Frigid Armor anyways. *Your build doesn't even use Blinding Surge, the point is Irrelevant. And how is this build not shut down by Blinding Surge, answer me that. OMG! You can liek use ToF for Damage Reduction even when blind! -Useless, you can't even cause burning without your Blazing Spear, and that will miss 90% of the time when blind. *Excuse me, I may as well claim that you are biased against Warriors and/or idealizing Paragons. But that is a baseless argument. The facts of the matter are that a Warrior does a better job than this build in its intended usage. I'm not idealizing anything. I'd appreciate if people realize that Warriors aren't the godly class. --Zinger314 15:58, 24 December 2006 (CST) *Taking arguments out of context and blowing them out of proportion won't win you any support here. Another note: This isn't intended for HA/GvG, in which case I agree that a Warrior is more effective. --Zinger314 16:12, 24 December 2006 (CST) *Good, at least we agree somewhere. Perhaps you should note that in the build's description. :Aren't people being overly critical and narrow-minded here? Giving an excuse that certain situations in PvE makes this useless is like saying don't play PvE. You will always find situations where certain builds are not effective. What's important is that a build is useful enough in a lot of situations and not just niche situations. Zinger314, I think you should add in where this build is mainly used, to stop people from thinking it's a primarily PvP build. Also... given the base energy a Warrior has and not having Leadership, I'm not too convinced that a Warrior does this better. He might be more durable, but that doesn't make it more effective. Hmm... on second thought... (continuing from my comment regarding the name below)... could the fact that you used the word "Tank" in the name that triggered all these "Warrior does it better" comments? --Ab.Er.Rant (msg Aberrant80) 02:07, 26 December 2006 (CST) ::^ Yes >< Entropy 02:21, 26 December 2006 (CST) :::It's not my fault if people fail to realize that Paragons have the same AL as Warriors. --Zinger314 10:51, 26 December 2006 (CST) ::::False. They get no bonus +AL vs Physical. Do your reasearch. 24.6.147.36 12:16, 26 December 2006 (CST) Suggestion :Note: I split this from the previous section to make it a less confusing read as this part is essentially a different topic. *You can change the elite to Focused Anger making "Go for the eyes!" much more spammable. However because of it's energy cost I have put in Glowing Signet. Instead of Aggresive Refrain, I changed it out with Flurry because of Agressive Refrains high energy cost. If your foe is under 50% health stop using Flurry. I have used this multiple times and I find it quite effective in PvP with a support character on your team. If used for AB switch out Ressurection Signet with Leader's Comfort. Leadership: 12 (8+4)| Command: 11 (10+1)| Axe Mastery: 12 Focused Anger| Blazing Finale| "Go For The Eyes!"| Flurry| "They're on Fire!"| Critical Chop| Glowing Signet| Resurrection Signet Or if you would want more healing take points from command and stick it in movtivation for Mending Refrain. Finale of Restoration is also recommended -RoxanneButterfly :I've used this build with Foc Anger too. It works better than the original IMO, much more damage. I never had energy problems though, in fact I had more energy because of spamming GftE. Just keep the build as is but change the elite to Foc Anger and take a different energy attack skill or somthing like Remedy Signet.--12pxWindjammer 12:59, 1 February 2007 (CST) Build Has Been Tested This build has been tested, and thus it shouldn't be dismissed so easily. I've been perfecting this build since the release of Nightfall. I've completed almost every Master quest with Morgahn wielding that build (including The Troubled Keeper.) It's due to the near-half damage reduction on the entire party from everything. And yet, because it "looks worse than a Warrior," it's automatically unfavored. --Zinger314 18:21, 24 December 2006 (CST) *That is not why this build is Unfavored. You claim automatic bias on the part of the voters. Perhaps some of them have also tested it for themselves and found it inferior. Also. Please keep in mind that just because something works doesn't mean it should be favored. As I stated above. "Anything works in PvE" is a general concept that gets used a lot here. So you got Masters with it...yah. Lots of other builds can do that in PvE - but they are Favored because they are even more flexible and/or do a better job of it than this build. Please don't automatically assume that unfavored means your build cannot work, period, end of sentence. If it works for you, then that's all fine and good. Unfavored really just means that "we at Wiki don't think it's good enough to be ranked with Favored". So maybe it is Good but not Good Enough. Ok? Don't take it personally. * 24.6.147.36 02:28, 25 December 2006 (CST) :* I strongly disagree with you User:24.6.147.36. This build works great. Many of the unfavoured votes are coming from people voting on their biases, and it can be seen in their votes, their comments, the retorts to them, and their own responses. When it becomes shown that their vote is due to misplaced reasoning, they just resort to "well... I think such and such build is still better..." Even once that reasoning is shown flawed. Most of the unfavoured voters willfully oversimplify a build in order to pass their judgement. There may also be a problem that the most active voters form a population of less than 30 people. Probably far less than that actually. I would say somthing like 10 or 15 people do the most voting, so it isn't really any strong community determining what is good and what isn't, but a very small population of people (I've even gone so far as to call them the wiki-clique before, which has gotten me no good favor). Because it is such a small population of the most active voters, the biases of these voters are going to be shown very strongly in what builds are voted in and what are not.--12pxWindjammer 13:16, 1 February 2007 (CST) Name Change? I'd suggest a name change, because, as it is, it's not really a tank. Bug :It depends how you define "tank," which has been interpreted in a million ways since GW started. I define a "tank" as someone who does damage in the forefront of the party, which this build satisfies. Plus, it's alliteration. You just have to love saying "ToF Tank." --Zinger314 15:01, 25 December 2006 (CST) ::Well, given the way Tank is defined in here, the "Tank" part is fine. --Ab.Er.Rant (msg Aberrant80) 01:56, 26 December 2006 (CST) i like it its real good for pve... not much use for pvp tho i wouldnt say its BETTER than a tank war.. cuz thats equivalent to comparing oranges and apples... still a good build ill be running this in pve i like it i agree it works very well and is very flexible and good to have with large teams. i made a variation for smaller sized groups that doesn't need command mastery that uses leaders comfort and signet of burning for energy management. Scythe Wouldn't this build work better with a scythe? You seem to be going for a hit all adjacent with your choice of attack skills, scythes have that already built in, to every attack. It also has the highest crit damage in game, meaning GftE would be more effective. You would gain more damage and the ability to hit adjacent to target without using an attack skill, and lose a little attack speed and armor. You could now choose another elite however, like Focused Anger, allowing GftE to spammed on every other attack (or even every attack when you hit 2 or more foes). This would ensure all adjacent stay on fire all the time, and you do massive damage with your scythe.--12pxWindjammer 22:27, 31 January 2007 (CST) Only problem with that completely sweet idea is that scythe only hits 3 adjacent foes, whereas I've seen cyclone hit 5 or so. Also would it be better with VoS? Sero haladan 11:47, 4 February 2007 (CST) : Been testing a P/D variation for a bit with the only problem of not being able to spam GftE enough Sero haladan 14:03, 9 February 2007 (CST) Does the build actually work? Just tested the build on isle of the nameless and the AoF only ever sets one foe alight, so it is in fact scuppered. could I have conformation please? Sero haladan 10:37, 3 February 2007 (CST) :that is, without blazing finale, but I seem unable to keep both echos up at once... ::Blazing Finale is simple to keep up, and really the only required one. Anthem of Flame is, strictly speaking, not at all necessary. You probably should not even bother with AoF once you are in a battle and spamming GftE. Just renew Blazing Finale when it needs (about every 30 seconds) and everything adjacent to you will be kept aflame. AoF is only in the build to keep Agg Refrain active when you are not actively fighting.--12pxWindjammer 14:08, 3 February 2007 (CST) :::is it me or does blazing finale not get renewed time-wise, so it lasts 33 secs with this build, but no more? Sero haladan 14:53, 3 February 2007 (CST) ::::Right. You have to recast it about every 30 seconds. It is the only recast required though, I think, and very manageable at 1 second.--12pxWindjammer 15:30, 4 February 2007 (CST) :::::Windjammer is correct on all these points. There is no real need for Anthem of Flame once battles are active, it is more or less used to keep up Agressive Refrain outside of combat. Blazing Finale is not difficult to keep on multiple allies. I try to keep it up on myself, warriors, dervishes, or assassins in the melee vicinity. 8 Second recharge, but it lasts for +30 seconds, and with GftE coming out ever 3-4 seconds, there is no doubt that most foes are kept burning for entire fights. This build owns. Doom Music 14:52, 9 February 2007 (CST) Fevered Dreams How bout this build on a team with one Fevered Dreams messie. The Messie puts FD on an adjacent mob and Blazing Finale and GftE spam reapply the burning just as the first one wears off. Basically every mob in the battle is burning and doing 50% damage. Meanwhile your team is doing craploads of damage.--12pxWindjammer 14:08, 3 February 2007 (CST) :This build has very little trouble spreading the burning as it is. I believe Fevered Dreams is intended for spreading several different conditions. Doom Music 14:48, 9 February 2007 (CST) How dos the ToF nerf affect this build? I just recently tested the build and I reckon it was much better before ToF nerf (50% -> 33%). It still seemed quite effective even nerfed and without the blazing finale (I am not yet that far). Creepy hells, I forgot to add signature --Neikius 11:54, 13 February 2007 (CST) Can't Wait for Blazing Finale I have been running this build on my Paragon without Blazing Finale (don't have it yet). While it doesn't have the oomph that setting everything on fire has, it still is a good build to run through NF until you get BF. Excellent build. Recommended runes? Just noticed this build has advice for only two runes. It should have something for all five, even if you just say "use anything for the other three slots". :) Issa Dabir 14:41, 30 March 2007 (CDT) Soldier's Fury How well would this build work with Soldier's Fury as the elite? You can take out both Aggressive Refrain and Anthem of Flame, since SF will be powered by having "They're on Fire!" up all the time. You'll lose some damage by not having Triple Chop in there, but the extra skill slot can be used for something like "Stand Your Ground!", or a self-heal like Leader's Comfort to increase durability. I guess it depends on which one is more important for the given situation: output or absorption of damage. 404notfound 19:11, 21 April 2007 (CDT)